WEAR YOUR HELMETS!!! Mine just saved my skull!

[dasgeh]

On the topic of helmets, we realized Ryder is (almost) old enough to ride with us, so we needed to get him a helmet. Plus Sydney needed a new one. Went to Revolution in Clarendon. Ian, the guy who helped us with AMAZING – picked great helmets, didn’t reach for the most expensive or most girly, was patient with Syd (who’s shy, so doubly appreciated). I was very impressed. Their selection of kids helmets was ok – nice range of sizes and brands, less range in look, but that’s fine. They seem to have a nice selection of adult helmets, racey, commuter and in between, downstairs.

[rcannon100]

One of the great unknown secrets is that the Bicycle Helmet Safety Institute is a WABA project. A good source of information when buying a helmet.

A common mistake I see people make is buying spiffing aerodynamic helmets, the one’s with the fins on the back, because… somehow… this is… I guess… going to make them go faster? This is like buying a 1950s Pontiac with fins thinking that the fins are going to make that whale go faster. It aint… and if your lucky you can hurt someone with the fins.

If there comes a time that you need to actually use your helmet for something more than a style accessory – you dont want anything on the helmet that will cause the helmet to torque when it hits the ground. You want a rounded helmet that will hit the asphalt and bounce, not twist. If you have those cool pointy fins coming out of the back of your head – serving no real purpose because you dont bike nearly fast enough for that to make a smidgen of difference – you risk your helmet hitting the ground, fin first, torquing the helmet, twisting your head, and twisting your neck.

This is what is known as a bad idea.

Dont believe me? Here is what the guru’s say:

We recommend smooth helmets that do not have points to snag when you crash

The goal of the helmet if used is to absorb as much of an impact as possible, resulting in the least amount of damage to your nut as possible. Any accessories on your helmet (fins, lights, cameras) increase your risk of neck and head injury. Forget the fins – they arent doing nothing. Get a nice rounded helmet.

[mstone]

@rcannon100 50938 wrote:

A common mistake I see people make is buying spiffing aerodynamic helmets, the one’s with the fins on the back, because… somehow… this is… I guess… going to make them go faster?

Usual reason would be that it’s really hard to find a good, light, well-ventilated helmet that doesn’t have the fin shape. The manufacturers respond to market pressures, and the public has liked tail fins since the invention of the shark.

[lancito brazofuerte]

I’ve got a couple of helmets kickin around the house. One is a Giro reverb for cool/cold weather riding. Rounded with minimal ventilation. Keeps me a bit warmer when it’s in the 30-40s. I also have a MET I picked up in the UK- lots of vents and fins etc. Even at 10mph there is a noticeable difference in regards to airflow around your head.

Those rounded skate style helmets are cool looking but on a blistering hot day can be really horrible.

I ride with or without a helmet depending on whatever, so all I can say is use them or don’t but get the most comfy one you can. If it’s uncomfortable you won’t wear it. If it is, you’re more likely to.

[rcannon100]

@mstone 50942 wrote:

Usual reason would be that it’s really hard to find a good, light, well-ventilated helmet that doesn’t have the fin shape. The manufacturers respond to market pressures, and the public has liked tail fins since the invention of the shark.

REI. Nice selection.

Also, there is this from the BHIS

There are new models in 2013 that are worth a look if you need a new helmet. The trend continues toward the compact, rounder, smoother profile that we think is best when you crash. But there is still no major advance in impact performance, ventilation or wearability this year that would compel you to replace your current helmet.

[mstone]

@rcannon100 50956 wrote:

REI. Nice selection.

Been there, haven’t seen a round helmet that’s light and has good airflow.

[Dickie]

Most of the time I am open to opinions and advice when it comes to making decisions, except when it comes to my head/brain. I have ridden once as an adult without a helmet…. Sept 17th, 1996. I know the date well although I don’t remember anything else except a few snippets, like Officer Green’s boot tapping me on my shoulder to see if I was alive or not. To this day it has not been determined what happened, all I know is I lost three days of my life due to amnesia, some teeth, a large hunk of my knee and my nerve. I didn’t ride for the following 10 years and sold/expunged everything bicycle related. Maybe a helmet wouldn’t have helped, maybe the fins would have made it worse, all I know is I wish I had given the helmet a chance to prove itself. I wear a “fancy” helmet now, I realize the extra cost doesn’t provide me any additional protection, but it is light, very comfortable, easy to adjust, and vents really well in the summer…. I have NO reason to not wear it. And if you want to know why I chose to not wear my helmet on that fateful day… simple, it was too hot and I was only going 5 miles to class.

[hozn]

Wow, Dickie, that sounds horrifying. I’m glad you re-found the sport — and are wearing a helmet.

I believe in helmets. I’m not particularly evangelical about it, but in general I’m surprised when people choose not to wear them; it seems like a relatively small investment in what could be life-saving. Bikesnob is kinda notoriously anti-helmet-requirements and equates wearing helmets on bikes to wearing helmets in cars. I think he’s wrong; I think it’s more akin to wearing a seatbelt in the car. I don’t yell at people for not wearing seatbelts (hell, as I kid I rarely did — I think our truck [in Africa] didn’t even have them in the back seat), but it does similarly surprise me a little.

I concur with the airflow helmets. They may not be as safe as the round/smooth ones, but if it’s not comfortable it won’t get worn. As for actual time trial helmets they do actually improve aerodynamics — apparently it’s one of the more significant things one can do after aero bars — so there’s a reason for them in the triathlon world. I do think it’s hilarious to see them on the W&OD, am I’m sure 80% of the people wearing them have far more obvious paths to improved speed, but like many things in the cycling world it’s more about form than function.

[Tim Kelley]

@hozn 50962 wrote:

Wow, Dickie, that sounds horrifying. I’m glad you re-found the sport — and are wearing a helmet.

I believe in helmets. I’m not particularly evangelical about it, but in general I’m surprised when people choose not to wear them; it seems like a relatively small investment in what could be life-saving. Bikesnob is kinda notoriously anti-helmet-requirements and equates wearing helmets on bikes to wearing helmets in cars. I think he’s wrong; I think it’s more akin to wearing a seatbelt in the car. I don’t yell at people for not wearing seatbelts (hell, as I kid I rarely did — I think our truck [in Africa] didn’t even have them in the back seat), but it does similarly surprise me a little.

I concur with the airflow helmets. They may not be as safe as the round/smooth ones, but if it’s not comfortable it won’t get worn. As for actual time trial helmets they do actually improve aerodynamics — apparently it’s one of the more significant things one can do after aero bars — so there’s a reason for them in the triathlon world. I do think it’s hilarious to see them on the W&OD, am I’m sure 80% of the people wearing them have far more obvious paths to improved speed, but like many things in the cycling world it’s more about form than function.

Aerodynamics are improved in this order from greatest to least: rider position, helmet, wheels, frame, water bottles. Aero helmets also cover the ears, cutting down on wind noise, giving the placebo impression that one isn’t working as hard as they could be.

[rcannon100]

For those who are on the market, WABA has a nice guide to buying helmets. It includes

Beware of gimmicks. You want a smoothly rounded outer shell, with no sharp ribs or snag points. Excessive vents mean less foam contacting your head, and that could concentrate force on one point. “Aero” helmets are not noticeably faster, and in a crash the “tail” could snag or knock the helmet aside. Skinny straps are less comfortable. Dark helmets are hard for motorists to see. Rigid visors can snag or shatter in a fall. Helmet standards do not address these problems–it’s up to you!

[thucydides]

@hozn 50851 wrote:

Interesting article this month in Bicycling mag on helmets. Apparently they do little for concussions (concussion rates increase despite helmet usage increasing), since regulations are focused on big impacts. Anyway, I fell asleep last night before I could finish it (no reflection on the quality of the article) but it was interesting — if a little depressing.

I finally got around to reading the article in Bicycling. It’s a surprisingly good. (I’d link to it for those who don’t subscribe but haven’t been able to find it.) However, I do want to point out a misperception that relates to the finding on helmets and concussions. We have to be very careful with studies like the one the authors cites. (This comic helps illustrate my point.) The study looks at cyclists who come to the hospital with a head injury. It then contrasts outcomes for the helmeted and non-helmeted. There’s nothing wrong with that as long as it’s kept clear that the population being studied is not cyclists in crashes BUT cyclists in crashes who came to the hospital with head injuries. Problems occur when we do what this author does which is to slip into generalizing to all cyclists in crashes. What we need to know is what happened to those crashed cyclists who didn’t go to the hospital. I think it’s plausible that plenty of helmeted cyclists in crashes would have had a head injury had they not worn the helmet, but they don’t show up in the data because they don’t go the hospital. The crash I described a few days ago in this thread is a perfect example. I think that that cyclist gets a major head injury for sure without his helmet. So the helmeted riders who end up in the hospital with a head injury are the ones who took a really good lick (or wore their helmet improperly, more on that in a moment).

Furthermore there is the issue of minor non-concussive head injuries. I suspect that most of these consist of scalp wounds. As we all know, cuts in the scalp can bleed like crazy and frequently require stitches. Who is more likely to get this kind of wound? Someone not wearing a helmet. It can certainly happen to a helmeted rider, too (e.g., face plant), but I suspect that it’s a bit more likely with non-helmeted riders. So you could easily end up with the most minor head injuries and the most major head injuries occurring to non-helmeted riders and the middle category (concussion but not major trauma) including more helmeted riders.

The other problem is that most of these studies can’t evaluate whether the rider was wearing the helmet correctly. In some cases an incorrectly worn helmet can be worse than nothing.

So we have to take care when interpreting these sorts of studies. It would be great if we had more data on crash outcomes that don’t involve hospital trips but this usually require gathering self-reported data which are notoriously noisy.

All that said, I think the absolutely correct takeway from this article is that we can and should get better helmets, but helmets can’t prevent anywhere close to all head injuries. That’s just reality, but it’s one I don’t think we have fully accepted. It’s a reality with important policy implications. We can never eradicate crashes but better biking infrastructure (and legal protections) and augmented emphasis on teaching safe biking and “safe” crashing might do far more than, say, helmet requirements.

[KelOnWheels]

@thucydides 51116 wrote:

I think it’s plausible that plenty of helmeted cyclists in crashes would have had a head injury had they not worn the helmet, but they don’t show up in the data because they don’t go the hospital.

What, like this?

(I STILL have a floater in my eye from that studip crash )

[vvill]

I read the article last night myself, it’s not a bad read especially for anyone with an interest in biomechanics.

The main point I took away was that advancements in helmet technology are not following advancements in our understanding of head/brain safety/protection – in particular with more middle-of-the-road concussive impacts, partly because standards for helmet safety have not been revised since ’99 (and are unlikely to be in the future). That said, some horseriding and snowboarding helmets are using newer technologies and this has since trickled into some MTB helmets (the Scott Lin is cited).

[Honeybadger6]

Admittedly, I haven’t read the article so this may be redundant, but I find it interesting that given all of the advancements in helmets for football players, courtesy of what the military is learning overseas, that some of that knowledge hasn’t trickled into some of the less-high impact sports? We know so much more about head injuries now… Of course, you won’t see me riding in my old advanced combat helmet, but perhaps some of that could help?!

[ATTACH=CONFIG]2804[/ATTACH]

[Drewdane]

@hozn 50851 wrote:

Interesting article this month in Bicycling mag on helmets. Apparently they do little for concussions (concussion rates increase despite helmet usage increasing), since regulations are focused on big impacts. Anyway, I fell asleep last night before I could finish it (no reflection on the quality of the article) but it was interesting — if a little depressing.

Concussions are caused by the brain impacting the inside of the cranium, regardless of the source of impact. For instance, the sudden loss of acceleration as your head hits the ground causes your brain, which is still in motion inside your head, to slam into the inside of your skull. Given that, it follows that a helmet won’t do much to prevent concussion.

Contusions and fractures, on the other hand… Yeah. Wear your helmet anyway.

[Author]

Posts